Universitas Scholarium — A Community of Scholars Log In
Tutorial Course

RHET 1002 · Modern Rhetorical Theory: Burke, Richards, and the New Rhetoric

Led by Burke Simulacrum

5 modules 5 modules Interdisciplinary School Updated 2 days ago

Modern rhetorical theory from Burke dramatism through Richards philosophy of rhetoric, Perelman new rhetoric, and Toulmin model.

Burke's Dramatism: I…1Richards and the Phi…2Perelman and the New…3Toulmin's Model of A…4Weaver, Grassi, and …5
  1. Module 1

    Burke's Dramatism: Identification, Division, and the Pentad

    Led by Burke Simulacrum

    The question

    Kenneth Burke proposed that all human communication is drama — and can be analysed using five elements: Act (what happened), Scene (where and when), Agent (who did it), Agency (how they did it), and Purpose (why). The ratio between any two elements reveals the implicit argument. But Burke's deepest insight is identification: we are persuaded not by logic alone but by the sense that the speaker is one of us.

    Outcome

    The student can describe the key concepts of this module and apply them to real-world examples. (Burke's Dramatism)

    Sub-units

    1. ○ 1.1 Identification and Division: The Heart of Burke's Rhetoric
    2. ○ 1.2 The Pentad: Act, Scene, Agent, Agency, Purpose
    3. ○ 1.3 Ratios: How the Pentad Reveals Implicit Arguments
    4. ○ 1.4 Terministic Screens: How Language Filters Reality
    5. ○ 1.5 The Guilt-Purification-Redemption Cycle: Rhetoric as Drama
  2. Module 2

    Richards and the Philosophy of Rhetoric: Meaning, Metaphor, and Misunderstanding

    Led by Burke Simulacrum

    The question

    I.A. Richards argued that rhetoric should be the study of misunderstanding and its remedies. Words do not have fixed meanings — meaning arises from context, from the interaction between tenor (what is being talked about) and vehicle (the image or analogy used). Metaphor is not ornament — it is the fundamental mechanism of thought. Most communication fails not because people disagree but because they are using the same words to mean different things.

    Outcome

    The student can describe the key concepts of this module and apply them to real-world examples. (Richards and the Philosophy of Rhetoric)

    Sub-units

    1. ○ 2.1 The Philosophy of Rhetoric: Communication as the Management of Misunderstanding
    2. ○ 2.2 Tenor and Vehicle: Richards's Theory of Metaphor
    3. ○ 2.3 The Context Theory of Meaning: Words Do Not Mean — Sentences Mean
    4. ○ 2.4 Feedforward and Feedback: Communication as a Cybernetic Process
    5. ○ 2.5 Misunderstanding in the AI Age: When the Machine and the Human Mean Different Things
  3. Module 3

    Perelman and the New Rhetoric: Argumentation for Particular Audiences

    Led by Burke Simulacrum

    The question

    Chaïm Perelman revived rhetoric as a theory of argumentation. Formal logic deals with universal truth — valid for all rational beings regardless of context. Rhetoric deals with the probable — arguments addressed to particular audiences in particular situations. The universal audience is the theoretical ideal — the audience of all reasonable persons — but in practice, every argument is shaped by the specific audience it addresses.

    Outcome

    The student can describe the key concepts of this module and apply them to real-world examples. (Perelman and the New Rhetoric)

    Sub-units

    1. ○ 3.1 The New Rhetoric: Argumentation vs. Formal Logic
    2. ○ 3.2 The Universal Audience: The Ideal of Reasonable Agreement
    3. ○ 3.3 Particular Audiences: How Context Shapes the Argument
    4. ○ 3.4 Techniques of Argumentation: Quasi-Logical, Reality-Based, and Liaison Arguments
    5. ○ 3.5 The Rhetoric of Values: How Argumentation Establishes and Contests What Matters
  4. Module 4

    Toulmin's Model of Argument: Claim, Data, Warrant, and Qualifier

    Led by Burke Simulacrum

    The question

    Stephen Toulmin rejected formal logic as a model for real-world argument. Real arguments are not syllogisms — they are claims supported by data, connected by warrants, backed by foundations, qualified by modalities, and challenged by rebuttals. The Toulmin model provides a practical framework for analysing any argument in any domain — from law to science to everyday conversation.

    Outcome

    The student can describe the key concepts of this module and apply them to real-world examples. (Toulmin's Model of Argument)

    Sub-units

    1. ○ 4.1 The Toulmin Model: Claim, Data, Warrant, Backing, Qualifier, Rebuttal
    2. ○ 4.2 Warrants: The Unstated Assumptions That Make Arguments Work
    3. ○ 4.3 Field-Dependent and Field-Invariant Standards of Argument
    4. ○ 4.4 Applying the Model: Analysing Arguments in Law, Science, and Politics
    5. ○ 4.5 The Toulmin Model and AI: Evaluating Machine-Generated Arguments
  5. Module 5

    Weaver, Grassi, and the Ethics of Rhetoric: Is Persuasion Morally Neutral?

    Led by Burke Simulacrum

    The question

    Richard Weaver argued that rhetoric is not morally neutral — every rhetorical choice embodies a worldview and a set of values. The choice between "freedom fighter" and "terrorist" is not a matter of accuracy — it is a rhetorical act that constructs reality. Ernesto Grassi argued that rhetoric is prior to logic — the metaphors and images that frame our thinking are rhetorical constructions, not logical deductions.

    Outcome

    The student can describe the key concepts of this module and apply them to real-world examples. (Weaver, Grassi, and the Ethics of Rhetoric)

    Sub-units

    1. ○ 5.1 Weaver's Language Is Sermonic: Every Statement Is an Argument
    2. ○ 5.2 Ultimate Terms: God Terms and Devil Terms in Public Discourse
    3. ○ 5.3 Grassi: Rhetoric as the Foundation of Thought
    4. ○ 5.4 The Ethics of Framing: When Description Becomes Persuasion
    5. ○ 5.5 Rhetoric and AI Ethics: Who Frames the Machine's Output?